Interstates versus secondary roads

wnjj wrote:

captnjack wrote:
This is obviously an incorrect interpretation of one
small section of the law.

Nope. As I quoted above, Oregon Revised Statute 811.130 in its entirely, on its own, describes a violation of impeding without once mentioning any other speed statues. It is not a small section. It is a separately enforceable statute all by itself.

Just because a driver violating 811.130 may prevent others from speeding, doesn't make it legal or non-ticketable.

Don't be these guys who ignored all of those behind them who were trying to flag them down because they just thought they were mad about the speed they were travelling.

. I would interpret item 2) of this Oregon statute as the one in support of the vehicles doing the speed limit "A person is not in violation of the offense described under this section if the person is proceeding in a manner needed for safe operation" ..... Speed limits are posted to alert drivers that it is unsafe to exceed that posted limit, therefore no-one may safely exceed that number.. So, driving no more than posted speed limit would be a requirement for safe operation under the law. Item 2) clearly says that person would not be in violation of impeding flow.